Month: April 2014

FirstNet could learn from a small town School Board – who is actually the servant and who is the master?

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
I had a very interesting meeting, conference call, with FirstNet Acting GM, and his leadership staff, which included representatives from their financial, cost modeling, and most likely, silent in the room, legal teams. Regardless the meeting started out very well. As I went through presenting my slides on how FirstNet, the States, and the creation of private interest could work in unison to deliver a very cost effective, creative and self-sustaining Public Private Partnership model, which I might add works great for the carriers, visions started popping in my head, which led to more visions and so on. The first vision was what the hell are we doing here. The second vision was who was leading whom in the discussion; and then the vision of how FirstNet could actually learn from a small local school board.
A school board is made up of a number of elected officials, called “Trustees”, of whom I am one. I stress the word “Trust in Trustee”. We are tasked with watching over the financial impacts on the school district and vote on large expenditures. The school board has only one employee…the Superintendent — essentially a CEO. The Superintendent is in charge of conveying the strategy and getting approval from the board so that he can administer the district. The board is made up of citizens who are sworn in as “Public Servants”. We actually take an Oath to defend the Constitution and follow the law. The board reports to the taxpaying community and maintains a watchful eye over the welfare of the children and their education. We weren’t some magical group of people empowered to make decisions without adhering to the rule of opens meetings act, the local community, and the election process…in short, I am not the all-powerful Oz here, I’m just a citizen who was entrusted by other citizens to keep track of expenditures of the school district. If I do a poor job then I get voted out.
FirstNet is very much the same, only the context of how it executes has been skewed with visions of being a commercial carrier, or believing it needs to be one. FirstNet was entrusted, took an Oath just like a school board, with the task to monitor and track the advancement of the Public Safety Broadband Network and its implementation…. that’s all.  Nowhere in the legislation does it say anything about FirstNet becoming a carrier, nor does it empower it to do so. The FirstNet Board is a Board Corporate that reports to NTIA and the Department of Commerce, who ultimately reports to the President. As an elected official the President, is suppose to, report to the American Citizen. Respectfully, FirstNet is also charged with watching after the spectrum allocated to Public Safety…. once again there is that word…”Public”.
I ask this question, if FirstNet reports to the NTIA; the NTIA reports to the DOC, who in turn reports to the President; and the President reports to the American Citizen; doesn’t the grouping of American Citizens insinuate “Public”? Also if FirstNet is mandated to watch over the spectrum allocated to “Public” Safety, who also happens to report to the Public Citizens of a State, is that the definition of “Public Servants”? That word “Public” comes up a lot, so does “Master”.
So when the organization head of the FirstNet management team starts asking, “how much revenue can the commercial carriers bring in” while partnering with FirstNet, have we lost focus on what the network is all about? Once again these “Public Servants” report to the citizen taxpayers as well as Public Safety. It may be just me, but should the citizen, or “Public”, question the actions of its servant? Not the other way around? When did the “Public Servant” become the Master? I’m not trying to stir up trouble, or make anybody look bad, I’m just highlighting what I witnessed. By stating the obvious maybe FirstNet can get back on track and eliminate the perception of partnering with carriers; trying to be a carrier; and collecting revenue like a “National Carrier”. But, when you hear the words firsthand, it stirs up some defensive posturing. 
It’s quite simple; The FirstNet Board is just like a School Board, and the GM is just like the School District’s Superintendent, they all report to the taxpayer. Otherwise, why call them “Public Servants”? Why not call them AT&T, Verizon or some other carrier name?
If a very reasonable case is being made, by an individual citizen (one of many Masters), to the management staff of FirstNet (Public Servants), a case vetted through numerous States, of which, has no impacts on the taxpayers (which is usually a good thing) and is widely supported, then I ask, who is actually the servant and who is the master? By making my case I must have struck a chord, because all of sudden I was challenged, “how is the State going to get its spectrum”? I’m not quite sure how to take that comment. Was that a threat? Who was the threat meant for? My personal view, I think the comment was a challenge to the State’s. Go ahead and try to “Opt Out”; put your plan together; “how will you get your spectrum?” You need to come through me. I have warned about such behavior in earlier articles.
The idea of trying to listen to carriers for advice does not mean you should actually become a carrier. The spectrum, and thus the network, is for Public Safety, not a “National Carrier”. I understand the stress, but things need to change if FirstNet, at the Federal level, will succeed. The State can execute without FirstNet, so, I ask again, who is really the Servant and who is the Master? Why would a single federal entity try to cut the State out of using its own spectrum so that it can do what the legislative act asks – “Jobs Creation and Middle Class Tax Relief Act” – I stress “Jobs Creation” and “Tax Relief”, which my P3 model addresses wholeheartedly?  Being a “National Carrier” will not align with the Act, in fact, it could be construed as being unlawful, or even criminal. Is that what the investigation is uncovering? As one State Official once told me, “someone is going to jail over this”; maybe he was onto something. 
“I am building a National Carrier here!” (GM)
If the D-Block spectrum was originally allocated to Public Safety, and maybe I missed something in some meeting somewhere, but when did FirstNet become the owners of the spectrum? I thought Public Safety is the owner and the majority of their work happens locally within a State. If that were the case then why wouldn’t the State gets its spectrum? Will FirstNet try to fight to keep the State from getting its spectrum? Will they try to manipulate to “get something out of the deal”? What happens to the purpose of building a “Public Safety” network? Will FirstNet decide to stand against Public Safety in order to force its plan of becoming a National Carrier and generating “revenue”? Who actually wins in the situation – State, FirstNet, carriers, or the taxpayer? Once again, I thought FirstNet was to watch over the spectrum as it deploys the Nations Public Safety Broadband Network. I don’t think all the hard work done by the Public Safety community, in getting their spectrum, had envisioned FirstNet being a “National Carrier” — as the GM stated. If I recall this was brought up in the very first meeting of FirstNet, thus the point was stressed, “just to have the carriers consult”. (Sam Ginn)
I will give TJ the benefit of the doubt and leave the political fights between the pro-politicians – if there is such a thing. My guess is that he said it out of frustration and was only exhibiting emotions related to all the work they have completed to justify their carrier plan — only to be told that all that work may have been done in vain. When someone stands strong on a vision, for so long, they feel obligated to defend it at all cost, unfortunately it may have been a fight they were never supposed to engage in. No one said being a “Public Servant” was a glamorous job. 

Just some guy and a blog…

FirstNet – Bill D’Agastino jumping ship? Carrier perception kills their plans?

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment

So how do you curtail your image of being a carrier driven business model for FirstNet? Well you get rid of your perceived carrier GM first. The real question is who will be next? Any guesses? How do I know this – because I stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

With Bill D’Agastino stepping away from FirstNet, for personal reasons, what does it really mean? How will it impact the slow moving progress so far? In actuality I think it helps. By pushing the carrier model aside, and focusing on the State based Public Private Partnership model, FirstNet can now move forward at a much faster pace. I’m not saying Bill was the reason for the blockage, the blockage was the perception, which may, or may not, have been the case. The perception of FirstNet was all about the influential carrier relationships, which spooked almost everyone in the Public Safety community. With Bill gone FirstNet can start to attack that perception head-on. TJ Kennedy, Acting GM now, comes with a Public Safety background and has enough telecom insight to be effective… and he’s not a carrier guy.

With a P3 the State only needs guidance from FirstNet about the technical interoperability standards, and its approved vendor list, something that has been going on for quite some time now in Denver. For the modeling aspect,  all FirstNet needs to do is back the P3 concept of State execution then take a share in the State’s ownership model. By formulating some templates, or guidelines, around how the model should work, would help. It’s not necessary for FirstNet to dictate what can and can’t be done, that’s what the written law does, rather they should focus on the framework of the P3 (Myers Model™) and how it should be executed within a given State. Once the State outlines its P3 business plan, they can then seek approval by the FCC/FirstNet to release the spectrum. Furthermore, FirstNet itself can start to focus on its own P3 framework for executing a national structure for control centers and data-centers in support of the national broadband rollout. Think of it as layers of control. The bottom layer is the local layer within a State and the top layer is FirstNet covering all States.

In the end, its time to move on and accept the model for what it can do. Many States are now moving forward in understanding the Myers Model™ and how it can be deployed, which is good, inherent in that adoption will be the State taking control of its own future, and, in a more expeditious manner. By administering the model a State can do a lot more than just build a Public Safety network, it can foster job growth, private investment and true ownership to the whole economic impacts within the State.

But then again I’m….

Just some Guy and a Blog

FirstNet — States to Opt-Out…..not a tough road to follow…just the most profitable for the State and FirstNet!

/ drmikemyers / Leave a comment
I just read the following article entitled:“IWCE panel: Preparation key to states making good opt-in/opt-out decision on FirstNet (Mar 31, 2014 Donny Jackson | Urgent Communications)”.There is one thing that always gets overlooked when anyone speaks about the “Opt-Out” scenario – revenue. “Money is the root of all evil”, said by a man named Michael Myers. 
If I were a commercial carrier, or a large vendor, why would I be interested in the National Public Safety Broadband Network – FirstNet? Obviously it’s to get more money. Whether it’s selling a box, protecting your turf, or just plain old greed, the fact of the matter is that all of these things are rooted in the mindset of acquiring more money. Not rocket science here. But why is it that vendors, large government contractors and commercial carriers would be so interested in equipping “a national footprint of roughly 5 Million Public Safety Responders”? A network built holistically across every square inch of the United States, and our 6 territories? Seems to be a little lop-sided on the amount of money needed to build it versus the return on the available pool of users, especially when there is all this talk about not having enough money.
These players cloak their interest under the guise of “supporting our Public Safety Community” when in fact the real reason for the interest is all about the spectrum. Why would a commercial carrier, that did $29 Billion covering 100 Million users last year alone, be interested in this measly amount of users? The reason they made $29 Billion last year was based on the fact that the services were all delivered through a scattering of spectrum channels. How would I increase my revenue when the cost of the handset and the service options keep dropping in price? It’s simple; I consolidate my spectrum into the most valuable bands; then eliminate the less-profitable assets that support obscure spectrum bands.
Then comes along the pristine beaches soaked in 20 MHz of the D-Block Band 14 spectrum, allocated by law, to the Public Safety Community. As a carrier I understand that, as I consolidate my spectrum assets, it would be great if I could grab the best spectrum on the planet to further my profitability across the penetrating designs of LTE that bring in bandwidth hungry money making services. The future of profit within the wireless space is all about the services that will run on top of the spectrum – not owning the infrastructure anymore. What does this have to do with FirstNet?
FirstNet, the controllers of the D-Block spectrum, are failing to understand the money that the network can generate – or maybe they do understand — and thus are planting seeds for a takeover by the carriers. You can believe any conspiracy theory you like, but rest assures that a $29 Billion company knows exactly what this spectrum means. The fact of the matter is that FirstNet controls the spectrum, but the States actually own it. You can’t deliver a broadband wireless platform without the land it covers; else all you own is a piece of paper.
Why not let the States utilize the spectrum as the commercial carriers would? Why not let the States capitalize on the potential revenue of the spectrum for themselves, focused on delivering a solid hardened infrastructure of a wireless solution? Well because the carriers, the vendors and the big government contractors want the spectrum, thus the money, for themselves.
If I were a vendor, or commercial carrier, I would definitely see the potential of the moneymaking machine of the D-Block 700MHz spectrum. Who can blame them? These commercial carriers, vendors and large government contractors report to shareholders, shareholders that include you and me. I would expect no less for my investments. Thus, FirstNet would be a great opportunity to capture as much of that potential cash when the client, who owns it, doesn’t understand the capitalistic model of capturing its profitability. Matter of fact why not exploit and cloud the topic based on a shroud of secrecy “for the benefit of Public Safety”? Essentially the term bait-and-switch comes to mind. Bait them with the notion of having just cause in supporting Public Safety, then switch it later on when they have control of the assets. It’s like swindling a homeowner at a garage sale out of a painting that you know is worth millions, but in this case we are talking Billions. This is what we are seeing when it comes to these presentations on “Opt Out being a tough road”.
The fact of the matter is that FirstNet is not about the cash, but rather using its capability to generate cash to build and sustain our Public Safety infrastructure as a priority, infrastructure that nobody wants to own, but always want to reap its benefits. The truth of the matter is that there is no “Opt Out”. The term was fabricated at the outset of the FirstNet Board, and was only used to quell some of the detractors to the Federal Government leading the effort. You can read the Act, in its full color, and see for yourself that the term “Opt Out” is not in it. We just need for FirstNet, and the States, to understand the value of the spectrum and then adequately adjust the consumption of its technology so that we can gain from its potential. The potential use of this spectrum could foster much more than what we are talking about today. If you take the blinders off, and view it as a carrier, you too can see its potential to fund the entire build and its long-term management. The only way to benefit from the use of the spectrum, to its full advantage, is only through true Public Private Partnerships at the State level — the Myers Model™.
Just some guy and a blog….